Core Members of Ethereum Foundation Stage Mass Exodus: 'Decentralization' or 'Dissolution'?

marsbitPublished on 2026-05-20Last updated on 2026-05-20

Abstract

In April-May 2026, at least six core members, including key engineers and researchers, departed from the Ethereum Foundation (EF). This followed the earlier exit of co-executive director Tomasz Stańczak. High-profile leavers included long-time contributors from the Protocol Cluster and the "Trillion Dollar Security Initiative." EF framed the departures as part of its "Mandate" restructuring aimed at reducing its central role. However, community concerns grew as core developer numbers fell from 225 in May 2025 to 169 in May 2026, though a recent one-month rebound of 63% was noted. ETH holdings in the EF treasury also decreased. Despite the leadership flux, Ethereum's overall developer activity remains substantial, with nearly 10,000 active ecosystem developers. The departures have sparked discussions about EF's future direction, coordination, and the practical meaning of decentralization for Ethereum, which faces challenges like price declines and project security concerns while aspiring to be a global financial infrastructure layer.

Author: Hristina Vasileva

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide Intro: During April and May 2026, at least six core members of the Ethereum Foundation (EF) left in rapid succession, spanning protocol engineering, cryptoeconomics research, and management. EF officially frames this within its "Mandate" framework as active downsizing, but the community sees: core developers dropping from 225 to 169, shrinking ETH holdings, and the Glamsterdam upgrade delayed. This Cryptopolitan report details the list of departures, the logic behind EF's restructuring, and the current state of ecosystem developers.

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) has lost several key contributors, sparking renewed questions about the organization's direction and Ethereum's future. This wave of departures follows Tomasz Stańczak's resignation as EF co-Executive Director after just one year in the role.

In April and May, a total of six contributors left or began long-term leave. Departures were concentrated in the foundation's core engineering teams and research department.

Some of the engineers were from the Protocol Cluster responsible for Ethereum's L1 design. This unit underwent restructuring, with engineers Barnabé Monnot and Tim Beiko departing subsequently.

Earlier, Josh Stark announced his departure after seven years at EF, where he served as co-chair of the 'Trillion Dollar Security Initiative.' Trent Van Epps left after five years, having been involved with organizing the Protocol Guild; he will continue contributing to the broader ecosystem part-time.

May Exodus Intensifies

The most recent to leave EF is Carl Beek, a seven-year veteran and a key figure in the Beacon Chain launch phase.

Julian Ma also recently resigned after four years of cryptoeconomics research at EF, focusing on mechanism design.

These two departures sparked greater concern within the Ethereum community, escalating discussions about EF's future direction. The foundation's own public statements have consistently focused on "supporting the ecosystem as a whole," deliberately downplaying its role as a central authority.

The departure of core members doesn't directly indicate problems with Ethereum itself. However, these exits have indeed reignited discussions about leadership, coordination mechanisms, and what the goal of "decentralization" actually entails.

Developer Activity Maintains a Baseline

Despite the high-level personnel turbulence, Ethereum's developer activity retains a solid baseline. Token Terminal data shows the project currently has 169 core developers, a 63% rebound over the past month. However, looking at a longer timeframe, core developers have declined from 225 in May 2025 to 169 as of May 19, 2026.

Caption: Ethereum core developers saw a slight uptick over the past month, but have declined from 225 in May 2025 to 169.

Source: Token Terminal

The overall number of ecosystem developers now lags behind Solana. However, according to Chainspect data, the Ethereum ecosystem still boasts 9,744 active developers.

EF is proceeding with a restructuring guided by its newly released Mandate document, adjusting its development focus. One of the Mandate's core objectives is to reduce the foundation's direct influence, which inherently involves parting ways with some key contributors.

Another practical issue facing EF is the shrinking ETH reserves in its organizational wallet. The foundation currently holds 103,660 ETH, having previously staked a portion and sold some reserves to BitMine.

The timing of this exodus is not ideal: Ethereum is being looked to as a critical infrastructure layer for global finance. The team restructuring also coincides with a peak period of concentrated attacks against decentralized projects, with the Ethereum ecosystem bearing the brunt.

Following these reports, ETH price continues to hover in a low range, down 40% over the past year. At the time of writing, ETH is trading at $2,117.02, despite the amount staked in the Beacon Chain contract reaching 31% of the circulating supply.

Related Questions

QAccording to the article, what is the primary reason the Ethereum Foundation (EF) gives for the recent wave of key member departures?

AThe EF officially attributes the departures to an active organizational downsizing under its new 'Mandate' framework, which aims to reduce the foundation's direct influence and decentralize its role.

QHow has the number of Ethereum core developers changed between May 2025 and May 2026, as mentioned in the report?

AThe number of Ethereum core developers declined from 225 in May 2025 to 169 by May 19, 2026, though it saw a 63% increase in the month preceding the report.

QWhich two recently departed EF members were highlighted as being key figures in the Beacon Chain's launch and cryptoeconomics research?

ACarl Beek, a key figure in the Beacon Chain launch, and Julian Ma, who focused on cryptoeconomics and mechanism design research.

QWhat financial pressure does the Ethereum Foundation face, as indicated in the article?

AThe EF faces financial pressure from its shrinking ETH treasury reserves, which now hold 103,660 ETH after using some for staking and selling a portion to BitMine.

QWhat broader community concern is sparked by the departures of EF core members, beyond the organizational changes themselves?

AThe departures have sparked discussions about leadership, coordination mechanisms, and the practical meaning and implications of Ethereum's 'decentralization' goal.

Related Reads

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Survive?

If the AI Bubble is Bursting, Who Will Remain? The debate over an AI bubble is intensifying, with figures like Ray Dalio warning of high levels and Jensen Huang seeing immense, early-stage opportunity. Both views hold truth: a speculative bubble in capital markets likely exists, mirroring the dot-com era, but the underlying technological shift is real and transformative. History shows that while bubbles burst—wiping out overvalued companies and speculative capital—they often leave behind critical physical and digital infrastructure. The dot-com bust, for instance, eliminated many firms but left the global fiber optic networks and data centers that enabled the rise of Amazon, Netflix, and cloud computing. Today's massive AI infrastructure investments (projected at trillions by 2030) in data centers, power, cooling, and GPUs may follow a similar path, creating the foundation for future applications. A key divergence from past bubbles is the "Jevons Paradox" effect in AI. As the cost of AI inference has plummeted by over 99.7% since 2023, enterprise spending on AI has skyrocketed. Cheap "tokens" have unlocked vast, previously uneconomical use cases, moving AI from simple chatbots into core business workflows—code generation, legal document review, scientific simulation, and financial analysis. The market is now in a phase of self-correction, weeding out superficial "API-wrapper" startups, but this cleansing process strengthens the ecosystem. The long-term trajectory is clear. The value is gradually shifting from capital expenditure (CapEx) on hardware to operational expenditure (OpEx) on transformative applications. As AI becomes a utility, the winners will be firms that deeply integrate it to solve vertical industry problems in law, healthcare, finance, and manufacturing. The泡沫 will recede, but the foundational shift towards an AI-powered era across all sectors is irreversible. The underlying productive force of AI contains no bubble.

marsbit22m ago

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Survive?

marsbit22m ago

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Remain?

**Summary: If the AI Bubble is Bursting, What Will Remain?** The debate around an AI bubble is intensifying, with figures like Ray Dalio warning of high valuations while Jensen Huang sees immense opportunity. This echoes the dot-com bubble, which saw massive wealth destruction but ultimately left behind critical infrastructure like undersea cables and broadband, enabling future giants like Amazon and Netflix. Similarly, today's AI boom involves trillions invested in data centers, power, cooling, and GPUs, while application-layer revenue remains comparatively modest. This investment-disparity signals a bubble. However, the core technological progress is real and accelerating. AI inference costs have plummeted by over 99.7% since 2023, making intelligence increasingly cheap and accessible. This cost collapse is unlocking vast new demand. Instead of reducing spending, enterprises are tripling their AI cloud expenditure. Cheap "tokens" enable AI to move beyond simple chatbots into complex workflows—automating code writing, legal document review, financial analysis, and scientific research. This follows "Jevons's paradox": improved efficiency leads to greater total consumption. The market is now undergoing a necessary purification, weeding out "API-wrapper" startups with no real moat. The deeper evolution involves a shift from capital expenditure (CapEx) on infrastructure to operational expenditure (OpEx) on value-creation in applications. While hardware vendors currently profit most, long-term value will migrate to AI-native firms solving vertical industry problems. Ultimately, a market correction will cleanse speculative excess but will not reverse the AI+ trend. The massive physical and algorithmic infrastructure being built will endure, becoming a cheap, utility-like foundation. Just as the internet became indispensable to all industries post-2000, AI is poised to empower and redefine every sector, moving society irreversibly toward an intelligence-augmented era. The bubble may burst, but the underlying productive momentum is solid.

链捕手29m ago

If the AI Bubble Is Already Bursting, Who Will Truly Remain?

链捕手29m ago

Microsoft CEO: In the AI Era, How Do You Define a Company's Moat?

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella argues that in the AI era, a company's true competitive edge, or "moat," is not determined by choosing the single most powerful model, but by its ability to build a continuous "learning loop." This system integrates and evolves by connecting human workflows, domain expertise, organizational judgment, and employee experience. He posits that future companies will accumulate two types of capital: Human Capital (employee knowledge, judgment, creativity) and "Token Capital" (a firm's own built and owned AI capabilities). Importantly, AI amplifies rather than devalues human capital. Human direction is essential to guide progress, as computational power alone is aimless. The core opportunity lies in creating a closed-loop system where human and token capital reinforce each other in a compound, self-improving cycle. A company must be able to preserve its unique institutional knowledge—its "company veteran" expertise—even if it switches underlying general-purpose AI models. This requires private evaluation benchmarks, reinforcement learning environments based on internal data, and queryable knowledge bases. Nadella warns against a future where economic value is concentrated by a few dominant models that commoditize entire industries' knowledge. Instead, the priority should be building a broad "frontier ecosystem" where every company, industry, and nation can own its learning loop. This allows organizations to retain control of their intellectual property, amplify employee capabilities, and ensure the economic value created by AI is captured within their own businesses and communities. True corporate sovereignty in the AI age comes from turning organizational knowledge into a compounding system that creates enduring, defensible value.

marsbit1h ago

Microsoft CEO: In the AI Era, How Do You Define a Company's Moat?

marsbit1h ago

ETFs Are Just the Ticket: The True Institutionalization of Bitcoin Is Happening Where You Can't See It

Beyond the Bitcoin ETF spotlight, a deeper institutionalization is underway, leveraging Bitcoin as a foundational financial primitive. Institutions are using Bitcoin for purposes long reserved for assets like U.S. Treasuries and gold: as collateral for loans, insurance reserves, and the backbone of rated bonds. Examples include a Barbados-based insurer capitalizing with $40M in Bitcoin reserves and Ledn's $188M securitization of Bitcoin-backed loans, which received the first-ever investment-grade rating (BBB-) from S&P for a digital asset-backed security. This structure was stress-tested during a 27% price drop in early 2026, triggering automatic liquidations that functioned as designed but revealed the systemic risk of synchronized selling across leveraged positions. Infrastructure is evolving to support this, with platforms like Anchorage Digital's Atlas network enabling secure, institutional-grade settlement and collateral management. Strategies like basis trades and corporate treasuries (exemplified by companies like MicroStrategy issuing billions in equity and debt to fund Bitcoin acquisitions) further integrate Bitcoin into financial mechanics. While ETFs solved "how to own" Bitcoin, these developments answer "what to do with it," embedding the asset into the working machinery of finance—as collateral upon which loans, derivatives, and structured products are built. The real, enduring institutional shift is happening in these largely invisible plumbing and financing systems.

marsbit1h ago

ETFs Are Just the Ticket: The True Institutionalization of Bitcoin Is Happening Where You Can't See It

marsbit1h ago

ZEC Co-Founder Responds to Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Orchard Pool to Be Sealed

ZEC Co-Founder Addresses Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Plans to Sunset Orchard Pool A security vulnerability was recently discovered in Zcash's Orchard shielded pool, raising key concerns. The primary questions are whether the flaw was exploited, if user funds are safe, whether users can verify the total ZEC supply, and if other similar vulnerabilities exist. Analysis suggests the vulnerability was likely not exploited prior to its discovery. It was found proactively by a researcher using specialized tools, not due to an active breach. The development team and mining pools acted quickly to contain the issue. Typical financially-motivated attacks would likely have left visible on-chain evidence, which has not been observed. User funds in Orchard are considered safe and should be recoverable, assuming no prior exploitation. If the flaw was never used, all legitimate funds can be withdrawn. The article outlines risks associated with moving funds to transparent addresses or other pools, but concludes that leaving assets in place is a reasonable option. Currently, users cannot independently verify that the total ZEC supply hasn't been inflated due to this bug. However, the planned Ironwood network upgrade is designed to resolve this. It will permanently close the Orchard pool to new deposits and internal transfers, allowing only withdrawals. This mechanism will cap total withdrawals at the amount of legitimately deposited funds, enabling anyone to cryptographically verify the supply post-upgrade. Multiple teams, including Shielded Labs, have conducted extensive audits focused on counterfeiting vulnerabilities, assisted by advanced AI tools. No additional flaws of this type have been found so far, increasing confidence that no other similar undisclosed vulnerabilities exist. In summary, evidence indicates the Orchard bug was probably not used, user funds are secure, and no other counterfeiting flaws are currently known. The upcoming Ironwood upgrade will restore users' ability to independently verify the total ZEC supply, closing this chapter.

Foresight News1h ago

ZEC Co-Founder Responds to Orchard Vulnerability: No Signs of Theft, Orchard Pool to Be Sealed

Foresight News1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of ETH (ETH) are presented below.

活动图片

Top Questions

Hot Categoriesright-arrow

Hot Tagsright-arrow